I have spent so much time criticizing Trump in another forum, I am honestly a bit burned out. I am trying to keep an open mind about him, but naming Priebus as his CoS was a big slap in the face to Ted Cruz supporters and other conservatives. I just don't believe that liberals criticizing anybody for being anti-Semitic have any credibility if they stayed silent for eight years while Valerie Jarrett gave political advice to Obama.

 

I really do not understand why liberals are so upset about Trump being elected. He is a close personal friend of the Clintons and he has been a liberal Democrat for most of his adult life. He criticized Romney's position on illegal immigration as being too harsh in 2012. During his first TV interview on Sunday with 60 minutes he said that the Clintons are good people who he does not want to hurt.

 

I hope that I am wrong, but I believe that Trump is closer to Bill Clinton politically than he is to George W. Bush. Liberals should be ecstatic that Trump was elected instead of a conservative Republican. Yet, they are already taking pot shots at his appointees, two months before he takes office. If liberals are perceived to not be giving Trump a fair chance, there will be a backlash against them among moderates and independents. The people who should be complaining right now are conservatives.

 

It's actually racist, anti-Semitic, hero to the KKK and the Alt Right movement but if you just want to stick with anti-Semitic then I understand. For now that one is much easier to prove.

 

I've already stated that I like the choice of Preibus and my sources of research label Preibus an 8 out of 10 when rating that choice of Chief of Staff. I've even stated I am more encouraged and pleased with Trump with each passing day. And I agree, the people who should be complaining are the conservatives and the people who chose to vote for Trump as he is seemingly walking back every campaign promise he made before Inauguration Day but yet all I hear is silence..........

It's actually racist, anti-Semitic, hero to the KKK and the Alt Right movement but if you just want to stick with anti-Semitic then I understand. For now that one is much easier to prove.

 

I've already stated that I like the choice of Preibus and my sources of research label Preibus an 8 out of 10 when rating that choice of Chief of Staff. I've even stated I am more encouraged and pleased with Trump with each passing day. And I agree, the people who should be complaining are the conservatives and the people who chose to vote for Trump as he is seemingly walking back every campaign promise he made before Inauguration Day but yet all I hear is silence..........

 

Anything is better than Hillary or Bernie.

I can take silence knowing neither of them are President.

It's actually racist, anti-Semitic, hero to the KKK and the Alt Right movement but if you just want to stick with anti-Semitic then I understand. For now that one is much easier to prove.

 

I've already stated that I like the choice of Preibus and my sources of research label Preibus an 8 out of 10 when rating that choice of Chief of Staff. I've even stated I am more encouraged and pleased with Trump with each passing day. And I agree, the people who should be complaining are the conservatives and the people who chose to vote for Trump as he is seemingly walking back every campaign promise he made before Inauguration Day but yet all I hear is silence..........

I have been hearing nothing but silence about Valerie Jarrett for eight years. If liberals have not had a problem with Obama's Iranian anti-Semitic adviser, then I suggest emphasizing Bannon's other alleged shortcomings. Otherwise, someone is bound to point out the hypocrisy of the attacks on Bannon for his alleged anti-Semitism.

 

One could argue that Jarrett may have influenced Obama in his disastrous Iranian deal. Whatever Bannon has done, he has not placed the lives of thousands of Israeli and American citizens at risk by negotiating a bad deal with one of the most anti-Semitic governments in the entire world.

I have been hearing nothing but silence about Valerie Jarrett for eight years. If liberals have not had a problem with Obama's Iranian anti-Semitic adviser, then I suggest emphasizing Bannon's other alleged shortcomings. Otherwise, someone is bound to point out the hypocrisy of the attacks on Bannon for his alleged anti-Semitism.

 

One could argue that Jarrett may have influenced Obama in his disastrous Iranian deal. Whatever Bannon has done, he has not placed the lives of thousands of Israeli and American citizens at risk by negotiating a bad deal with one of the most anti-Semitic governments in the entire world.

 

Valerie Jarrett is a horrible anti-Semite and I can't believe Barack Obama would put her in his staff. I guess the years of loyalty they have together overruled common sense. If I was Barack Obama I never would have put a known anti-Semite on my staff or given them power to do things that could potentially hurt my vision of America.

 

 

Your move.

Valerie Jarrett is a horrible anti-Semite and I can't believe Barack Obama would put her in his staff. I guess the years of loyalty they have together overruled common sense. If I was Barack Obama I never would have put a known anti-Semite on my staff or given them power to do things that could potentially hurt my vision of America.

 

 

Your move.

Maybe I should wait 8 years to condemn Bannon. :lol2:

Maybe I should wait 8 years to condemn Bannon. :lol2:

 

If you choose to. You don't have to though. My point has been proven.

If you choose to. You don't have to though. My point has been proven.

I am trying really hard to care about Bannon, but it nothing is happening. My problem with Bannon is that he ruined one of my go to websites. Trump turned Drudge, Breitbart, Free Republic, and Fox News Channel into campaign propaganda mills.

 

As for Bannon, with all of the racists and people with ties to radical Muslim groups in Obama's administration, I really don't expect that Trump will top him in that area. If Trump stabs Israel in the back or goes on racist rants, then I will be happy to condemn him for his actions. But there is a better chance that I will be condemning him for putting every out of work RINO in DC back to work. I hope that he proves me wrong.

I am trying really hard to care about Bannon, but it nothing is happening. My problem with Bannon is that he ruined one of my go to websites. Trump turned Drudge, Breitbart, Free Republic, and Fox News Channel into campaign propaganda mills.

 

As for Bannon, with all of the racists and people with ties to radical Muslim groups in Obama's administration, I really don't expect that Trump will top him in that area. If Trump stabs Israel in the back or goes on racist rants, then I will be happy to condemn him for his actions. But there is a better chance that I will be condemning him for putting every out of work RINO in DC back to work. I hope that he proves me wrong.

 

I hope Trump proves me wrong too.

White nationalists see advocate in Steve Bannon who will hold Trump to his campaign promises

- CNNPolitics.com

Horowitz: Anti-Bannon Hysteria More Evidence the Left Has Lost Touch with the American People - Breitbart

OK, I give.

 

What is 'alt-right' again?

 

Never head of it before this. The wiki has been updated over 500 times since August. So its 'definition' must be very fluid.

 

Wiki:

 

Alt-right - Wikipedia

 

In fact the opening definition in wiki points to two articles that came about in August of 2016 that note that is basically a political labeling narrative. So 'alt-right' is not any specific defined group. It was created by the Dems/liberals/radicals/etc. to provide broad labeling.

 

Brietbart media continued on after Brietbart passed away (under...well, lets not go there). The company is alternate in that it is a born-on-the-web media that offered alternative to MSM. It was/is very critical of the Obama administration and would have been as critical of a Clinton Administration. So, yes, it would be natural target for discrediting via extremist labeling.

 

So where is there a real story here? Is the made up lebel of 'alt-right' the best the MSM has? Is it the best response the Dems can bring forward?

OK, I give.

 

What is 'alt-right' again?

 

Never head of it before this. The wiki has been updated over 500 times since August. So its 'definition' must be very fluid.

 

Wiki:

 

Alt-right - Wikipedia

 

In fact the opening definition in wiki points to two articles that came about in August of 2016 that note that is basically a political labeling narrative. So 'alt-right' is not any specific defined group. It was created by the Dems/liberals/radicals/etc. to provide broad labeling.

 

Brietbart media continued on after Brietbart passed away (under...well, lets not go there). The company is alternate in that it is a born-on-the-web media that offered alternative to MSM. It was/is very critical of the Obama administration and would have been as critical of a Clinton Administration. So, yes, it would be natural target for discrediting via extremist labeling.

 

So where is there a real story here? Is the made up lebel of 'alt-right' the best the MSM has? Is it the best response the Dems can bring forward?

 

I looked this up to and its all I can find. Its no movement. Its a term apparently the MSM has made up to describe people wanting to build the wall, stop the inflow of refugees from Syria etc after I examined it closer. Its a tag and alot have grabbed the bull by the horns and ran with it like its some big organized movement. CNN at its best reporting for sure. LOL

I looked this up to and its all I can find. Its no movement. Its a term apparently the MSM has made up to describe people wanting to build the wall, stop the inflow of refugees from Syria etc after I examined it closer. Its a tag and alot have grabbed the bull by the horns and ran with it like its some big organized movement. CNN at its best reporting for sure. LOL

 

I think you might want to check out this a little closer.

I think you might want to check out this a little closer.

 

I read the whole thread.

"To see what is in front of one's nose needs a constant struggle."